The Charge of the Macedonian Phalanx

[Paralus]

Philip's and Alexander's pikemen fought in the same way as did the men of Antiochus, Antigonus or Ptolemy. Of course the men of Alexander were veterans before even they crossed the Hellespont and this surely enhanced their ability and endurance within and without the battle, but Hellenistic armies should not be perceived as having received less training than the levies of Philip. They trained for years and fought in different formations as was the case in Magnesia, where the training of the phalangites is excelled by Appian. Polybius also presents the Macedonian phalanx as a well trained body of men, singling out the peltasts of Philip etc.

That the men of Alexander’s army were veterans is correct. Justin clearly describes them as such and, given the small number who returned home as newly-weds, there is no real reason to doubt the general statement.

Whilst the general nature of the phalanx was the same in Hellenistic times, it seems clear – going by Polybius’ claims – that its agility had lessened. This likely has as much to do with lengthening sarissae as with training. The point about the Seleucid phalanx is well made. This was a phalanx that had been in use for some decades and obviously was well drilled. Its failure at Magnesia was due to the fact that it was isolated and that it attempted retirement from the field with elephants.

Elsewhere I’m not certain we can make the same claims. Polybius describes Ptolemy IV creating and training a phalanx from scratch for Raphia. It won the day though it might better be said that Antiochus, in the tradition of Demetrius Poliorcetes, threw it away in a overly spectacular cavalry charge.

With the Antigonids there clearly were arrangements in place for the recruitment and training of the phalanx. The “Amphipolis Regulation” and the Drama / Cassandreia Conscription spell out various regulations – even unto the age of those in the peltasts (hypaspists) and its agema. That their phalanxes were as good or well trained as those of Philip II and Alexander is, though, debatable.

The phalanx work at Sellasia was a standout and, it might be presumed, that Doson had the time necessary (and experience given his initiation into his role) to put an experienced phalanx into the filed. Certainly the peltasts / caetrati will, one thinks, be as “professional” a lot as were their predecessors, the hypaspists. That his predecessors had access to such well trained phalanxes is another question. Gonatas limped from defeat to defeat with the occasional victory interspersed. It’s unlikely that when he finally settled into his royal role Macedonia, after decades of war and turmoil, had the necessary trained manpower.

Certainly Philip V did not when it came to his showdown with Flammininus. Livy, writing for Romans and hence having no reason to deprecate the Roman victory with “excuses” for Philip, provides a description of how poor his manpower resources were (33.3):

Owing to the perpetual wars which had for so many generations drained the manhood of Macedonia there was a serious lack of men of military age, and under Philip's own rule vast numbers had perished in the naval battles against the Rhodians and Attalus and in the campaigns against the Romans. Under these circumstances he even enrolled youths of sixteen and recalled to the colours men who had served their time, provided they had any stamina left. After his army was brought up to its proper strength he concentrated the whole of his forces at Dium and formed a standing camp there in which he drilled and exercised his soldiers day by day whilst waiting for the enemy.

That said, Polybius makes too much of the ground and its unsuitability in this engagement – possibly to support his own view of the phalanx. The reason that Philip V lost here is the fact that “the greater part of his phalanx was still on the march” and never formed into line of battle. That which did – his peltasts and that part of the phalanx with him – succeeded admirably until taken in the rear – nothing to do with the ground.

The ground definitely had an effect at Pydna if the descriptions are correct. Here too it might well be said that the pursuit of the Romans by the phalanx was its undoing. This toom, perhaps, had something to do with decent officers and training.